>The BLOB_APPEND is not CONCATENATION, it is non-standard function
> with custom semantics.
Yes, it's non-standard function. But even non-standard function can behave in
similar way other functions behave in SQL world. It's not the first
non-standard function we have.
--
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022, at 17:58, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
>The answer is the same - for user convenience. When I want to append
> something to the
> already existing blob, I doesn't expect to destroy my blob just because
> nothing is
> appended to it.
How is that different from `update foo set bar
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022, at 18:56, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
>I replied to Jiří who definitely read that discussion ;)
But I read it like last week, completely, because I discovered it as part of
reading RN. I wasn't in the discussion as it was unfolding.
--
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
https://www.tabsoverspa
Em 11/08/2022 12:58, Vlad Khorsun escreveu:
11.08.2022 17:26, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
On 11-08-2022 16:21, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
11.08.2022 17:10, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
Why was this NULL behaviour chosen?
To make BLOB_APPEND more convenient for users.
I don't understand how using a differen
While I’m hardly entitled to a vote, it is almost impossible to find a use
case where making a concatenation with a NULL a NULL is useful. NULL
should be interpreted as “there ain’t nothing there” rather than a poison
pill for other contexts.
In Amorphous, concatenation of a NULL treats the NULL
11.08.2022 19:31, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
On 11-08-2022 18:04, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
11.08.2022 17:46, Jiří Činčura wrote:
I was thinking the same when reading the discussion on GH.
There was a LOT of time to write something at that discussion.
Nobody asked about NULL's there, while it was doc
On 11-08-2022 18:09, Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel wrote:
On 8/11/22 19:04, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
So far I don't see it as mistake.
+1
Function is anyway damned non-standard.
And as soon as we have documented behavior - no problems at all.
Time will tell. I think deviating NULL behaviou
On 11-08-2022 18:04, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
11.08.2022 17:46, Jiří Činčura wrote:
I was thinking the same when reading the discussion on GH.
There was a LOT of time to write something at that discussion.
Nobody asked about NULL's there, while it was documented since a very
beginning.
Unfort
On 11-08-2022 17:58, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
11.08.2022 17:26, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
On 11-08-2022 16:21, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
11.08.2022 17:10, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
Why was this NULL behaviour chosen?
To make BLOB_APPEND more convenient for users.
I don't understand how using a different N
On 8/11/22 19:04, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
So far I don't see it as mistake.
+1
Function is anyway damned non-standard.
And as soon as we have documented behavior - no problems at all.
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
11.08.2022 17:40, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
I noticed that BLOB_APPEND always returns a blob of SUB_TYPE TEXT, even if the first blob is binary or other type of blob. Is that
expected?
No, the intention was to use type\charset of first arg (if not NULL).
I'll check and fix it, thanks.
Regards,
V
11.08.2022 17:46, Jiří Činčura wrote:
I was thinking the same when reading the discussion on GH.
There was a LOT of time to write something at that discussion.
Nobody asked about NULL's there, while it was documented since a very beginning.
I believe it's not late to make correction (hey, w
11.08.2022 17:26, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
On 11-08-2022 16:21, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
11.08.2022 17:10, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
Why was this NULL behaviour chosen?
To make BLOB_APPEND more convenient for users.
I don't understand how using a different NULL behaviour then standard for operations
+1
András
Feladó: Jiří Činčura
Elküldve: 2022. augusztus 11. 16:46
Címzett: For discussion among Firebird Developers
Tárgy: Re: [Firebird-devel] BLOB_APPEND and NULL
I was thinking the same when reading the discussion on GH. I believe it's not
late to ma
I was thinking the same when reading the discussion on GH. I believe it's not
late to make correction (hey, we all make mistakes) and have consistent
behavior.
--
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
https://www.tabsoverspaces.com/
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lis
I noticed that BLOB_APPEND always returns a blob of SUB_TYPE TEXT, even
if the first blob is binary or other type of blob. Is that expected?
Mark
--
Mark Rotteveel
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
On 11-08-2022 16:21, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
11.08.2022 17:10, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
Why was this NULL behaviour chosen?
To make BLOB_APPEND more convenient for users.
I don't understand how using a different NULL behaviour then standard
for operations in SQL/Firebird is convenient. To me it
The new BLOB_APPEND function has a NULL behaviour that is not consistent
with the normal NULL behaviour. Using NULL in BLOB_APPEND behaves as an
empty string, while the normal behaviour for functions and operations
involving NULL is to result in NULL.
For example, normal concatenation:
select
18 matches
Mail list logo
